One thing is to be a Calvanist and other a Mechanist, one does not
imply or require the other because God does not necessarily have to
conform to be only involved in the initial condition nor is he
restricted, unless voluntarily, to work in the elect "to will and to
do" mechanistically. Moreover, regarless of what you may think the
sciences will or will not achieve, the NMR experiments on religious
people (see NATURE) is precisely a sort of "Spirit-Detector", at least
for the naturalistic scientist who restricts herself, by MN, to
naturalistic explanations. BTW, I am one who believes that there is a
fine connection between the physical and supernatural; the scientists
finding a chemical responsible for my persistant prayer life (I wish)
would be finding the "physical" cause of my experience without access
to the pre- or supra- physical cause. However, the crucial point of
the questions was not address by your short comment. Thanks anyway.

EGM

--- "William A. Wetzel" <n6rky@pacbell.net> wrote:> Hi E.G.> > If you believe that God works all things for the good of the elect...> The> issue of "mechanics" of faith should be no problem. As for naturalism> for> faith (it applies only in the physical sense). But the soul is where> it's> more than that. And until there is a "Holy Ghost Detector" I am sure> that> science will never answer (if any) transcending issues.> > The "Atom" was once a metaphysical concept - until the 20th century> :)> > Best Wishes,> William - N6RKY> > Best Wishes,> William - N6RKY> > E G M wrote:> > > > Hi folks,> > > > I return to throw a few questiona in your brainstorming machinery> > prompted by an article in NATURE, where experiments on religious> > persons are proposed in order to identify the chemical substance(s)> > responsible for religious experience(s) such as prayer, the baptism> of> > the Holiy Spirit, etc. The article is to me alarming/disturbing> and> > even affensive since I am a Christian.> > > > A bit more before the questions. I understand that the> judeo-christian> > religion has "evolved" in the last 5k years or so. Obviously to me> > this type of "evolution" is short of being "naturalistic" since> several> > "supernatural" events plus the inspired revelation of the> scriptures> > ocurred, IMO, by interventions of the Divine in human affairs. > Now.> > > > Do you (teistic evolutionists) believe in the naturalistic> evolution of> > religion or religious experiences, in particular the judeochristian> > one?> > > > Would it bother you if scientists find a naturalistic explanation> for> > your faith to explain away your particular preference and devotion,> > etc.?> > > > Are they "wrong" for assuming a priori that there must be a> > naturalistic explanation for religious experiences (faith)?> > > > Is the Holy Spirit in you a chemical alteration that first took> place> > at conversion/baptism?> > > > Did this alteration happened supernaturally or naturally,> > mechanistically, as a meme propagation/replication?> > > > Well those are enough for now. I will hang up and "listen" to your> > comments. Thank you very much. And don't forget your mother this> > weekend.> > > > EGM> > > > _________________________________________________________> > Do You Yahoo!?> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com> > -- > William A. Wetzel> icq-uin# 13983514> http://home.pacbell.net/n6rky> http://www.qsl.net/n6rky> mailto:n6rky@pacbell.net> mailto:n6rky@qsl.net> > >

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com